Re: SCC

Valdis.Kletnieksat_private

On Mon, 29 Jul 2002 10:24:36 PDT, Clint Byrum said:

> Heh.. Linux, even modified, is still the "Intellectual Property" of
> anyone who has done work on the modified kernel. Those people have
> licensed the work under the GPL. Therefore, this modified Linux's code
> must be distributed to anyone who receives the binaries, as per the
> terms of the GPL. 

Which doesn't say that SCC has violated the GPL - it says that NSA may
be in trouble for *distributing* it.

Hint - why are nVidia's non-GPL drivers OK?  Because I can download them,
BUT I CAN'T DISTRIBUTE THEM.

To re-quote Mark's original note:

> SCC by accepting the Sole Source Contract from the NSA and performing 
> the work by modifying Linux you accepted the terms of the GPL. Since 
> Linux uses the GPL, SCC was required by LAW to accept the terms of the 
> GPL. They modified Linux and distributed SELinux to the NSA.

What Mark got wrong here is that the mods are almost certainly a "work for
hire" and SCC didn't "distribute" them - legally, SCC made modifications to
NSA's copy.

Which leaves the situation as most of us understand it - NSA is left wondering
whether *ITS* mods (as done by SCC) are encumbered and thus not distributable.

/Valdis